Telekinesis:fling skyward?

[Len]

Heck, the FAQ contradicts itself.

Which is convenient for rules lawyers, because if you accept a single contradiction as true you can use it prove any logical proposition.

(I knew that math degree would come in handy some day.)

 

[Egres]

Actually, I'm the first one that points out errors in the FAQ, or in Skip's articles.

But this time we aren't talking about a clear contrast between the Sage response and the RAW.

Here we are debating about the proper interpretation of a bad worded spell.

In this case the author's interpretation is the right one, no matter we like it or not.

 

[Felix]

Heck..this is their game!

Maybe for you.

When I play, it's my game.

Here we are debating about the proper interpretation of a bad worded spell.

In this case the author's interpretation is the right one, no matter we like it or not.

It is the DM's interpretation that matters, not the author's. But since we have no collective DM, we sit around and debate what would be reasonable rulings were these questions to come up in a game. Yes, the author's opinion and the FAQ (for whatever reason ) are given some weight in setting a standard, but they are never, ever the final call on a rules question.

The core books are the final word.

When they are interpretable, as they are in the telekinesis spell, you have discussions like this one as to what should the spell be able to do.

Frankly, I think Telekinesis is a great spell even without using it to Fling Skyward, but there is nothing in that spell to make me think that I couldn't use it to that effect. You can use it to make objects or creatures zing at something else. They will get a will save for that, and then the spell ends either way.

Because it's clearly within the rules to say "I fling him at the mosquito buzzing 30' above his head", I don't see how saying "fling him 30' up" makes any bit of a difference. You will have the exact same result. To rule otherwise is parsing, and will force PCs to begin targeting small particles in the air, which I think is silly.

To avoid that silliness, I would rule that you can create a Fling Skyward affect already, using the Violent Thrust option of that spell.

 

[Saeviomagy]

In this case the author's interpretation is the right one, no matter we like it or not.

Except the author states no interpretation. He doesn't state "someone who is not a MoTUH cannot fling a target skyward", merely that someone who IS a MoTUH CAN fling a target skyward.

Which is right. It just seems silly to list it as an advantage of a class, let alone the capstone ability of a class.

 

[moritheil]

Maybe for you.

When I play, it's my game.


It is the DM's interpretation that matters, not the author's. But since we have no collective DM, we sit around and debate what would be reasonable rulings were these questions to come up in a game. Yes, the author's opinion and the FAQ (for whatever reason ) are given some weight in setting a standard, but they are never, ever the final call on a rules question.

The core books are the final word.

When they are interpretable, as they are in the telekinesis spell, you have discussions like this one as to what should the spell be able to do.

Frankly, I think Telekinesis is a great spell even without using it to Fling Skyward, but there is nothing in that spell to make me think that I couldn't use it to that effect. You can use it to make objects or creatures zing at something else. They will get a will save for that, and then the spell ends either way.

Because it's clearly within the rules to say "I fling him at the mosquito buzzing 30' above his head", I don't see how saying "fling him 30' up" makes any bit of a difference. You will have the exact same result. To rule otherwise is parsing, and will force PCs to begin targeting small particles in the air, which I think is silly.

To avoid that silliness, I would rule that you can create a Fling Skyward affect already, using the Violent Thrust option of that spell.

Yes, yes. This is reminiscent of "Hey, if I get a bucket of snails, and I have Great Cleave . . ."

We have a collective DM in the sky! He runs a no-magic campaign.

 

[Felix]

...bucket of snails...

Yeah, because it's absolutely rediculous to think that with telekinesis you could pick someone up and throw them! :\

We have a collective DM in the sky!

What does He have to do with this?

 

[moritheil]

Yeah, because it's absolutely rediculous to think that with telekinesis you could pick someone up and throw them! :\


What does He have to do with this?

1. Just noting the absurdity that occurs if you rule you can't fling someone upwards.

2. You said we had no collective DM. Knee-jerk response.

 

[Felix]

1.

Ah, gotcha.

2.

If he's the DM, I guess the big question is "who are the NPCs, and let's kill them and take their stuff".

 

[Kelek72]

I am currently running The Standing Stone by WOTC and an NPC has the ability to throw PC's with telekinesis as a 12th level sorcerer. His tactics clearly list straight up in the air as an option.